[Princess Doreen]

[quote=Riot;752303]

No. That's not the point. Nobody is debating the debt numbers. We've all posted the same numbers. The debate here is about who increased that debt.

For example, it's ridiculous and false to say Obama increased the debt "this" much, when billions of those monies spent in 2009-2010 during his administration were not monies he approved and spent.

Billions were approved by Bush - the wars, the first stimulus, TARP, etc - all that spending was created by Bush, but those monies were not all spent and done with in the last 5 weeks of his administration. Obama couldn't have recalled spending those monies if he'd wanted to, it was passed law, it was set those monies would be spent even if McCain had won. And that was a Bush II spend.

So look at Obama's spending during his administration, but you cannot take the billions spent in 2009 and 2010, due to first stimulus, TARP, bank bailouts, Bush's war commitments, etc and blame Obama (or McCain if it were McCain) for that. That's crazy.

Oh, sure, let's drag out the "Let's blame Bush" chestnut. Guess Bush didn't inherit a tanking economy when he took office and then get hit with the 9/11 disaster 8 months into office?!~

Should the projected 2011 deficit be blamed on Bush? Obama is going to balance the budget by trimming $1.1 trillion over 10 years.

The numbers don't wash.